The simplified formula for the calculation of aortic valve area: potential inaccuracies in patients with bradycardia or tachycardia.

L. D. Hillis, M. D. Winniford

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Since the Gorlin equation for calculation of aortic valve area is somewhat complicated, a simplified formula has been introduced in which the cardiac output (in liters/min) is divided by the square root of the peak pressure gradient across the valve (in mmHg), yielding a valve area in cm2. This study was done to examine the reliability of this simplified formula in patients with bradycardia or tachycardia. In 68 patients with aortic stenosis, aortic valve area was calculated with both formulae, and the results were compared with one another. In the 43 individuals whose heart rates were 65 to 100 beats/min, the results of the Gorlin equation and the simplified formula showed excellent agreement (absolute percentage difference, 8 +/- 8% [mean +/- SD]). In contrast, in the 25 patients whose heart rates were less than 65 or greater than 100 beats/min, the absolute percentage difference between the results of the two formulae was 18 +/- 13% (p less than 0.001). Although the results of the two equations were especially likely to be disparate in these patients, there was no predictable relationship between them. Thus, in patients with bradycardia or tachycardia, the simplified formula should be utilized with caution and cognizance of its potential inaccuracy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)301-303
Number of pages3
JournalCatheterization and Cardiovascular Diagnosis
Volume13
Issue number5
StatePublished - Sep 1987
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Bradycardia
Aortic Valve
Tachycardia
Heart Rate
Aortic Valve Stenosis
Cardiac Output
Pressure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

The simplified formula for the calculation of aortic valve area : potential inaccuracies in patients with bradycardia or tachycardia. / Hillis, L. D.; Winniford, M. D.

In: Catheterization and Cardiovascular Diagnosis, Vol. 13, No. 5, 09.1987, p. 301-303.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{6fd68512e07d4de08246e2a2ffde00bd,
title = "The simplified formula for the calculation of aortic valve area: potential inaccuracies in patients with bradycardia or tachycardia.",
abstract = "Since the Gorlin equation for calculation of aortic valve area is somewhat complicated, a simplified formula has been introduced in which the cardiac output (in liters/min) is divided by the square root of the peak pressure gradient across the valve (in mmHg), yielding a valve area in cm2. This study was done to examine the reliability of this simplified formula in patients with bradycardia or tachycardia. In 68 patients with aortic stenosis, aortic valve area was calculated with both formulae, and the results were compared with one another. In the 43 individuals whose heart rates were 65 to 100 beats/min, the results of the Gorlin equation and the simplified formula showed excellent agreement (absolute percentage difference, 8 +/- 8{\%} [mean +/- SD]). In contrast, in the 25 patients whose heart rates were less than 65 or greater than 100 beats/min, the absolute percentage difference between the results of the two formulae was 18 +/- 13{\%} (p less than 0.001). Although the results of the two equations were especially likely to be disparate in these patients, there was no predictable relationship between them. Thus, in patients with bradycardia or tachycardia, the simplified formula should be utilized with caution and cognizance of its potential inaccuracy.",
author = "Hillis, {L. D.} and Winniford, {M. D.}",
year = "1987",
month = "9",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "301--303",
journal = "Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions",
issn = "1522-1946",
publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The simplified formula for the calculation of aortic valve area

T2 - potential inaccuracies in patients with bradycardia or tachycardia.

AU - Hillis, L. D.

AU - Winniford, M. D.

PY - 1987/9

Y1 - 1987/9

N2 - Since the Gorlin equation for calculation of aortic valve area is somewhat complicated, a simplified formula has been introduced in which the cardiac output (in liters/min) is divided by the square root of the peak pressure gradient across the valve (in mmHg), yielding a valve area in cm2. This study was done to examine the reliability of this simplified formula in patients with bradycardia or tachycardia. In 68 patients with aortic stenosis, aortic valve area was calculated with both formulae, and the results were compared with one another. In the 43 individuals whose heart rates were 65 to 100 beats/min, the results of the Gorlin equation and the simplified formula showed excellent agreement (absolute percentage difference, 8 +/- 8% [mean +/- SD]). In contrast, in the 25 patients whose heart rates were less than 65 or greater than 100 beats/min, the absolute percentage difference between the results of the two formulae was 18 +/- 13% (p less than 0.001). Although the results of the two equations were especially likely to be disparate in these patients, there was no predictable relationship between them. Thus, in patients with bradycardia or tachycardia, the simplified formula should be utilized with caution and cognizance of its potential inaccuracy.

AB - Since the Gorlin equation for calculation of aortic valve area is somewhat complicated, a simplified formula has been introduced in which the cardiac output (in liters/min) is divided by the square root of the peak pressure gradient across the valve (in mmHg), yielding a valve area in cm2. This study was done to examine the reliability of this simplified formula in patients with bradycardia or tachycardia. In 68 patients with aortic stenosis, aortic valve area was calculated with both formulae, and the results were compared with one another. In the 43 individuals whose heart rates were 65 to 100 beats/min, the results of the Gorlin equation and the simplified formula showed excellent agreement (absolute percentage difference, 8 +/- 8% [mean +/- SD]). In contrast, in the 25 patients whose heart rates were less than 65 or greater than 100 beats/min, the absolute percentage difference between the results of the two formulae was 18 +/- 13% (p less than 0.001). Although the results of the two equations were especially likely to be disparate in these patients, there was no predictable relationship between them. Thus, in patients with bradycardia or tachycardia, the simplified formula should be utilized with caution and cognizance of its potential inaccuracy.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0023405574&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0023405574&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 3664627

AN - SCOPUS:0023405574

VL - 13

SP - 301

EP - 303

JO - Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions

JF - Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions

SN - 1522-1946

IS - 5

ER -